Template talk:!

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Dubious redirect[edit]

The former redirect of this page to Qif conditionals turned out to be a bad idea after {{!}} was protected, folks might need to add comments here. -- Omniplex 23:58, 21 April 2006 (UTC)


Please, add iwiki link to russian page [[ru:Шаблон:!]]. --Zserghei 19:21, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Better add {{editprotected}} to attract the attention of an admin. I've done this below for your proposal. -- Omniplex 19:46, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. I didn't know about this template. --Zserghei 20:34, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Done. --CBDunkerson 22:26, 1 May 2006 (UTC)


Please, add interwiki link to the dutch page [[nl:Sjabloon:!]]. --Neet 12:03, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Done. --CBDunkerson 22:11, 21 May 2006 (UTC)


Please, add interlanguage link to the Norwegian (bokmål) page [[no:Mal:!]]. __meco 12:29, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

I figured out how to do it myself. __meco 12:33, 23 October 2006 (UTC)


Hallo, people. Could someone put a new interwiki to [[hsb:Předłoha:!]]? Its from the uppersorbian wikipedia. Thanks and greeting. --Tlustulimu 19:59, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Done. --CBD 09:18, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Is this really a good idea?[edit]

We have an alternate (html style) table syntax that works fine with conditionals. Using that will work fine, will still work when the template is copied to other wikis that may or may not have this template and is scarcely more verbose than this hack. If i don't see a good reason for keeping this i'm taking it to WP:TFD Plugwash 21:48, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

This is a replacement for an important missing syntax element on m:ParserFunctions (PF) (see talk there). This will likely be replaced by new syntax. So it is normal to do things like these here as a template in early stages (we have done the same with {{qif}}). By doing this, we can see how useful that missing syntax would be. There is a need to have the ability to mix PF with Manske tables. TfD'ing this is likely to fail. --Ligulem 21:55, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
While I much prefer using HTML, until we have some sort of "template code style guideline", killing this off would be premature. —Locke Coletc 22:01, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
The primary benefit of using the ! template over the HTML that I see is in consistent formatting. Since wiki table markup (rather than HTML) is used pretty much exclusively in cases where conditionals are not involved the closer we can get to that the easier it is for people to understand how conditionals work. More people are used to putting formatting information after a '|-' than would understand to include them inside an HTML <tr formatting>. Thus once people understand that template ! just takes the place of '|' it is probably easier to follow. Wiki markup also automatically handles closing the rows, headers, cells, et cetera. It's a kludgy hack, but so is mixing in HTML. I'd like to see a better solution, but I don't see any need to replace any of the existing methods. --CBDunkerson 22:21, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Please add interwikis[edit]

de:Vorlage:! / zh:Template:! / zh-yue:Template:! --Hello World! 14:52, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Done. --CBD 01:42, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

New template limits[edit]

May I kindly ask an empowered soul to change the template according to what I wrote at User:Ligulem/tlim? Example what should be done here [1]. --Ligulem 15:37, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Done. --CBD 20:46, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

I need the wikicode for this template[edit]

I'm working on a small, newly-created wiki for a collaborative fiction project (I'll link it if you want me to), and I'm the only editor, at least as far as I know, with much knowledge of how wikis work. Therefore, I've been asked to find some way of reproducting Template:Infobox Military Conflict for this wiki.

However, upon copying over the code for the template in question, I found that it wouldn't work without the use of this one. Can I have the wikicode for the sake of replicating it on this other wiki?

CameoAppearance 07:38, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

It's also necessary to copy over Template:Infobox Country and most likely others that relate to people, as well. CameoAppearance 07:57, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
You can get the 'wiki code' of any page by clicking the 'Edit this page' link or a corresponding link on protected pages which says something like 'View page source' (I don't remember the exact wording). For this template the source is just the '|' character. That's the only relevant bit. The rest is all documentation. --CBD 16:26, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
...oh. Thanks. I'll do that. CameoAppearance 17:31, 21 August 2006 (UTC)



Please add pt:Template:! at the interwikis. --Slade (TheJoker) 16:35, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. Note that this template uses the doc-page pattern, so it doesn't require an admin to update the interwikis. --ais523 16:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Equivalent templates for square and curly brackets?[edit]

Are there equivalent templates for square and curly brackets? If so, what are they called? --Homunq 22:18, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't think so, this is more a hack then anything else, and I don't believe that it's required for the other brackt types --T-rex 23:04, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Need help[edit]

Sorry if I'm being daft, but this Parser Functions stuff is a tad confusing. I want to put the code [[2|1]] in an #if. Do I just use the pipe, do I use this template, or is these some other way to do this? Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 13:13, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

The creator of {{bar}} has the same question, I think. That template seems to be a duplicate of this one, but I'm not sure. —MC 18:04, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
The template is not needed because the "|" inside balanced brackets is not mistaken for a parameter separator of a parser function.--Patrick 00:19, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

New preprocessor[edit]

This template is copied to several other wikis, and is highly used there too. With the new preprocessor, nested templates may break if {{!}} is incorrectly used in them. As I guess people may get into trouble with it, and look here for a solution, I would like to describe a fast solution to most of the issues:

Do use {{!}} inside a template when you are dealing with table code. Don't use {{!}} when dealing with the parameters of a nested template. So for example, a template which was defined like this for the old preprocessor:

{{#if: {{{1}}}|

Should be updated to such:

{{#if: {{{1}}}|

Hope this helps, hujiTALK 21:33, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for a very helpful instruction! I also noted that for link piping, such as [[Target|display title]], {{!}} should still be used inside template calls. -- Sverdrup (talk) 18:04, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
I don't think so, "{{3x|[[a|b]] }}" → "b b b " [2].--Patrick (talk) 00:44, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Ah, then any of | or {{!}} work. -- Sverdrup (talk) 00:55, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
That's right.--Patrick (talk) 01:03, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Examples, please[edit]

Could someone please add to the documentation actual examples of where this template is, and is not, required for proper parsing? Same goes for the similar "see also" templates. - dcljr (talk) 09:41, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, this template is tricky to use. I instead simply use HTML tables instead of wiki tables. Then I don't have these problems at all. That is, then I don't need to use this template. That makes the code more readable and saves a lot of transclusions which also saves some server load.
--David Göthberg (talk) 21:54, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Update The Used on part[edit]

its now used by 2,800,000 pages please edit it if possible or insert is used by over X pages {{editprotected}} Hybirdd (talk) 20:58, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Updated. §hep¡Talk to me! 22:47, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Duplicate of Template:Pipe[edit]


This template (Template:!) is a duplicate of Template:Pipe.

Please replace all content on Template:! with the following:

#REDIRECT [[Template:Pipe]]

Thanks. --Lightsup55 ( T | C ) 15:14, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I'd suggest it be the other way around, since almost no pages use Template:Pipe. That page is unprotected so anyone can do it. - Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 15:58, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 Done The other way around. —Ms2ger (talk) 18:17, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
It would've made a bit more sense to also do a page move so that the actual template is called Template:Pipe and that Template:! is just a shortcut. I'll put this request in Wikipedia:Requested moves. --Lightsup55 ( T | C ) 18:54, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Undone - You guys have misunderstood these templates. {{pipe}} is not a duplicate of {{!}}. They are two different templates with very different functionality. They can not be merged straight off, since that breaks the templates that use them. Thus I had to revert the edit.
{{pipe}} inserts the code &#124;, which does render as a pipe in the web browsers. But it does not interfere with the MediaWiki parser. Thus it can be used in text inside wikitables and parserfunctions without causing any altered function of them.
{{!}} inserts an actual pipe character that is parsed by the MediaWiki parser. Thus it does have effect inside wikitables. It is used to delay parsing by the pipe for one round so that a wikitable pipe can be placed inside and controlled by for instance an #if statement.
{{!}} is used on more than 3 million pages, so please don't damage that template. {{pipe}} is only used in a handful of templates, but if it should be redirected to {{!}} then those templates first have to be edited so they don't break. And there are some other pages that describe its usage and they then also have to be updated first.
However since the {{!}} is used in so many places it would cost a lot of server load if people instead started using a redirect to it. Because of that reason all redirects to {{!}} was deleted long ago. Thus I strongly advice against redirecting {{pipe}} to it. And before anyone says "we should not worry about performance": Well, when a template is used on 3 million pages, then we do need to worry about performance. It is the most transcluded template on Wikipedia.
--David Göthberg (talk) 07:14, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Is there an equivalent for the hash/number sign?[edit]

A complex template I'm working on is misinterpreting a '#' inside of ParserFunctions as an instruction to form a numbered list. Is there a similar workaround for {{#}}? (talk) 17:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

I think this should work in your case:

<nowiki>#</nowiki> Not a numbered list.

Which renders like this:

# Not a numbered list.

--David Göthberg (talk) 05:14, 15 March 2009 (UTC)


I've made a small diagram of how this template work.


Feel free to convert to SVG and upload to Wikipedia, if someone finds it useful. --Explorer09 (talk) 07:44, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Oops, the diagram is wrong. This template cannot be used to separate parameters in templates, only in tables. Explorer09 (talk) 13:34, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


{{editprotected}} To save space, use:


instead of

|<noinclude>{{template doc}}</noinclude>

MC10 (TCGBLEM) 19:36, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Not done: I don't see a reason for this. They're both redirects to {{Documentation}} anyways. Given that this is <noinclude>'d anyways, it doesn't matter much. - Rjd0060 (talk) 20:06, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
Then, replace the redirection for {{Documentation}}. Locos epraix ~ Beastepraix 20:33, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
Anyway, it's pointless. Locos epraix ~ Beastepraix 20:33, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikilnk to explanation of high-risk template[edit]

Is there any reason why the bolded phrase high risk template in the template documentation is not linked to the explanation at Wikipedia:High-risk templates? I suggest this be done, and while doing so, add a hyphen to the visible text, creating high-risk template.Set theorist (talk) 07:30, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Seeing no argument, I did it. Set theorist (talk) 03:14, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Cymru.lass, 28 December 2010[edit]

{{edit protected}} This is a request for edits to multiple templates (the documentation ofTemplate:Edit protected said I should just put {{editprotected}} on one page. List of templates:

Requesting the addition of {{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>NAMESPACE}}|<includeonly>[[Category:Pages with incorrectly substituted templates]]</includeonly>|}}to the templates listed above, as well as <!--{{templatename}} begin--> and <!--{{templatename}} end -->. If any of these templates are subst'ed on a page, this string of code will add the page to Category:Pages with incorrectly substituted templates so someone can come along and unsubst the template. The hidden comments will serve to identify the start, end, and name of the improperly subst'ed template. The list of templates above was taken fromWikipedia:Substitution#Templates that should not be substituted andWikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup. This is just a list of fully protected templates; if no one objects to this, I can just go ahead and update the semi- and non-protected templates myself.Wikipedia:Substitution#Templates that should not be substituted lists reasons that each of these templates should not be subst'ed. This code is already in place on a number of templates such as {{advert}}. ---cymru.lass (hit me up)(background check)00:38, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Since the code is the same in all of these templates, is it possible to put the code itself in a template and transclude it? It would be easier to maintain this way. --Bsherr (talk) 20:43, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
  • It sounds like a reasonable idea, but if it's being done to {{stub}}, surely it should also be done to all stub templates? (and if so, surely it would be easier to do that by some amendment to the asbox metatemplate? Grutness...wha? 21:57, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Agree with Bsherr: Creating a template with the substcheck and implementing it on everything is a good idea. It should be done for all the template above, except for {{!}} because most users of ! would have enough wiki-knowledge to know not to subst it. Besides, doesn't substing {{!}} break the templates just like if a plain pipe was used? — Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 02:39, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Agree with Patrick. Please be very careful doing this on templates that are used multiple times on pages, due to template limits. I would advice against adding it to !. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 15:47, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Not done For now. Far too controversial without discussion. I, for one, have a serious problem with this on {{!}} as, at a minimum, it is going to cause a reparse of ... well... probably just about every page out there right now. Admittedly this goes into the Job queue but still that's a lot of extra, unnecessary work. There are a few others listed of concern as well. Discuss first, then request the change. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 20:41, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

  • Comment Unfortunately the benefits can't be gained without using the code explicitly (in each template), as far as I am aware. It should be non-contentious to add it to the remaining clean-up templates. {!} I agree does not require it. Stubs and infoboxes I suspect are rarely substed, although it is a right mess when infoboxes are, stub templates should be relatively harmless substed (substing Asbox is another matter). The chemical element templates I think are OK substed? Some of the user talk page items, I believe are supposed to be substed. Rich Farmbrough, 00:17, 30 December 2010 (UTC).
    • I just went off the list at the Wikipedia: page named above. Most of the user talk stuff is supposed to be subst'ed (e.g., warnings, welcome templates, etc.), but things like {{sockpuppet}} and a few other things aren't (there's a rationale on that WP page). Where should I go about starting a discussion on this? Also, should I just go ahead and add it to the (non-protected) cleanup templates that it isn't already on? Some of them like {{cn}} and {{COI}} already have the code, but a bunch don't. --- cymru.lass (hit me up)(background check) 01:32, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Doing so with ! in particular would break a number of templates: It's sometimes deliberately substed into a page when using a straight pipe would confuse the parser (at least I have done that from time to time).
Anyhow, I think it's generally better to prevent substitution altogether, by substituting to a transcluded form of the template. I've started a section at a random maintenance template, Template talk:Dn#Prevent substitution, and would like to try it there for a bit before cautiously adding it to more maintenance and tag templates. Infoboxes are problematic with this approach since they have too many parameters. Amalthea 10:41, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

I completely agree. I just used this feature about 30 minutes ago for orphaning a template after a TFD result. This template should absolutely be able to be substituted. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:41, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Defaultsort appears to be broken[edit]

Since Yesterday, { { DEFAULTSORT:text } } appears to be unserviceable, for example in [ [ Category:Electric Locomotives of South Africa ] ] where pages I've recently visited end up at the top of the list instead of at their defaultsort positions. André Kritzinger 10:24, 10 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andre Kritzinger (talkcontribs)

True, but this is not the place to discuss it - this is the page for discussing improvements to the {{!}} template.
For an existing discussion of the problem concerned, please see WP:VPT#categorically random categories. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:48, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
OK Thanks. (Works right again today.) André Kritzinger 12:40, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from , 31 October 2011[edit]

Poor Grammar: SHOULD NOT READ: "Fedorov was the first Russian to win the Hart in 93/94" (As only one player wins the Hart at the end of each season, he was the only player, Russian or non-Russian, to win the Hart at the end of the 93/94 season).

SHOULD READ: "At the end of the 1993/94 season (or "In 1994"), Fedorov became the first Russian born player to win the Hart."

Georgehwk (talk) 12:18, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

This is the page for discussing improvements to the {{!}} template. Please describe your problem on the talk page of the article with which you have concerns. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:53, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Edit request for !([edit]

I am trying to have to levels of brackets on a new navbox template; this: ( [ ] ). However, since right after !( I have a wikilink, it shows up as [[[wikilink]] on the preview. Is there a way to fix this? This first edition saved of Template:RC consecrated life will have this although I may use some other method if I can't fix this issue. >> M.P.Schneider,LC (parlemusfeci) 16:54, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

I actually figured out a fix for this although it's wierd. I used the following: {{!(}}<nowiki></nowiki>[[wikilink]] and it showed up right. Do we want to add the <nowiki></nowiki> to the template. Hopefully that makes sense (it is how it is displayed, not as the wikicode - not that displaying it that way was easy, I mean how many times can you write nowiki on one line). >> M.P.Schneider,LC (parlemusfeci) 16:58, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Changes with that effect would actually break the purpose of the template, they are supposed to have that quirky syntactic behavior to work around other wikicode quirks. If you want a plain square bracket it's usually best to use the HTML entities &#91; and &#93; → [ ]. Amalthea 19:11, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
OK thanks. I haven't coded directly at that level of HTML for a while and did not thank of that solution. >> M.P.Schneider,LC (parlemusfeci) 19:54, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
I tried to edit the documentation for just Template:!( to add the HTML code as an option but my edit was accidentally to several templates. I don't know how to fix this. Please help. >> M.P.Schneider,LC (parlemusfeci) 08:46, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Ok. Amalthea 09:45, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Edit request from Belchfire1, 16 August 2011[edit]

New Bernstein mayor is Lee W Bettis, Jr, an attorney from New York. He is a sign of the big changes coming to this gateway micropolis.

Belchfire1 (talk) 03:04, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi, it looks like you followed some links to an unrelated page. I see you were able to edit the New Bern, North Carolina article, so I trust we can close this discussion. Cheers, — Bility (talk) 21:53, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Please correct grammar throughout, "the Pakistan" etc... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brettpaul2000 (talkcontribs) 22:47, 26 March 2012 (UTC)


Sugaon is a village.


This is the talk page for discussing amendments to the page Template:!/doc. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:25, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 April 2014[edit]

Template used on 2.2 mil pages, not 2.5 as suggested (talk) 17:19, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Padlock-silver-open.svg Not done: The page's protection level and/or your user rights have changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. Jackmcbarn (talk) 19:15, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 20 July 2014[edit]

{{!}} was made a formal magicword a build or two ago, making this template and it's documentation outdated if not obsolete.

It still shows over 2 million uses however - can an admin preform a null edit to see if that helps get all that recursive link caching refreshed to reflect the actual [magicword] state? -- George Orwell III (talk) 14:00, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done A null edit wouldn't have done it, as now only real edits trigger a recursive link update. I've made some tweaks inside the noinclude tags to make it work. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 06:55, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
@Mr. Stradivarius: -- does that mean this API....
is pointless now too? Its been a godsend over on WikiSource but it doesn't seem to do much, if anything, here on WP. I was thinking the lack of the admin bit here was making the difference in results but the more I look into it, the more I get the feeling its due to something else - like [cascading?] template protections... or just the fact its hard to "move" millions of "uses" on demand?

Anyway, thanks for the attention. -- George Orwell III (talk) 08:11, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Not sure about that. You'd have to ask someone who knew more about the API. I've known it to take up to a month for the job queue to finish processing templates with millions of transclusions, though. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 08:38, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
&forcelinkupdate updates all links in the link table (without purging the cache of the pages). An edit updates the links and clear the cached pages too. A null edit updates the link on the current page, and can be done with &forcelinkupdate too. See WP:edit WP:Null edit and the next section too. Christian75 (talk) 22:35, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
... which is pretty much only half of what is ultimately needed. That is why &forcerecursivelinkupdate is used in my API string above.

I can't find anything relevant to this at WP:edit btw. -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:43, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

my mistake, it should have been WP:Null edit Christian75 (talk) 23:32, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Since it wasn't immediately obvious, here's a link to the MediaWiki docs describing the new magic word: mw:Help:Magic_words#Other. Short story: apparently it is exactly the same as the template (replaces all instances of {{!}} with a pipe character. —Locke Coletc 17:32, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Restore protection[edit]

Regardless the TFD result, this change has managed it appears to be broken when it is transcluded in Viva la Vida or Death and All His Friends, or wherever it is transcluded. Can this be fixed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tbhotch (talkcontribs) 20:58, 7 August 2014‎ (UTC)

I see no reason for protection. Also I see no reason that transclusions should be broken, we should make wikimarkup as resilient as we reasonably can. All the best: Rich Farmbrough08:26, 14 August 2014 (UTC).
If you want protection, ask at WP:RPP. But like Rich said, this template most certainly doesn't need it. And if something is using this, that's what's broken, since correct uses of {{!}} won't. Jackmcbarn (talk) 12:09, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Uses can be found here (i.e. my sandbox, currently). To deliberately break a page so that it can be fixed seems a little awkward, to say the least. All the best: Rich Farmbrough16:35, 14 August 2014 (UTC).
I don't consider that deliberately breaking it. Anything that transcludes Template:! is already broken by that fact alone, and things that are broken are better off being obviously broken rather than subtly broken, because that way it can be fixed rather than spreading unnoticed. Jackmcbarn (talk) 14:17, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Template for discussion for this page[edit]

Was there a recent templates for discussion for this? If so, it appears the administrator forgot to put the notice on this talk page. I have no idea how I would find it. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 04:26, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Added! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:36, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, Oiyarbepsy (talk) 04:38, 10 September 2014 (UTC)